vendredi 21 décembre 2007

A recent UPI report outlined Israel’s new policy of assassinating suspected terrorists on American soil. In other words, Israel is now going to officially carryout terrorism on U.S. soil.

Isn’t that what murder is? As an American citizen you cannot murder, why should agents of a foreign government have any such right in your country?

The UPI report read, “Israel is embarking upon a more aggressive approach to the war on terror that will include staging targeted killings in the United States and other friendly countries, former Israeli intelligence officials told United Press International.” UPI claims to have verified this information with a dozen informants. The report goes on to say that Israel will go forward with this policy, “even if it risks complications to Israel's bilateral relations."

Such a policy by Israel that has no regard for the national sovereignty of the United States requires a reevaluation of an existing allied relationship. It is a callous disregard for not only the laws of the United States, but also the security, safety, and rights of its citizens.

What Israel terms as targeted assassinations is really the commencement of a low-grade war against its enemies. By carrying out acts of war on American soil, Israel will be committing acts of war against the United States.

Bringing its war to America, Israel is endangering the lives of Americans, including American Jews. Surely, as Israel’s campaign of terror is carried out against its enemies, there will be retaliatory action in the United States by Islamic militants. Are synagogues and Jewish schools immune from such horror? They will likely be the first targets. While less than three percent of Americans are Jews, and respectively three percent are Muslims, do we want them battling it out in our streets?

By proclaiming its license to kill on American soil, Israel places itself on the list of rogue nations diametrically opposed to the United States. Terrorism may be acceptable in the third world. It is not acceptable in the United States. This policy by definition is state sponsored terrorism. Maybe there should be weapons inspectors taking a look at Israel’s nuclear program next?

How exactly do we determine the innocence of the murdered victims? Since Israel now has no regard for the nation where it murders perceived terrorists, it is safe to say that they would also have no regard for the nationality of the alleged terrorist. What if some of them are American citizens? Are we going to allow a foreign nation to murder U.S. citizens too?

The UPI report also says, “Israeli hit teams, which consist of units or squadrons of the Kidon, a sub-unit for Mossad's highly secret Metsada department, would stage the operations”. If Israeli hit teams are in place in the United States, what will prevent them from targeting U.S. officials that aren’t willing to send billions of dollars in foreign aid to Israel? Far fetched, not really when we’re talking about a nation that is openly planning terrorism in the United States.

Yes, openly, because a story this sensitive would have never leaked unless it was meant to be leaked.

If Israel is going to have a policy of terrorism on U.S. soil then it is not only plausible that it will kill American citizens that it considers to be enemies, but it is also likely that they will attack American targets and try to blame it on the enemies of Israel.

It’s bad enough that according to a PBS Transcript Senator Graham of the Select Committee On Intelligence said that classified evidence reveals that foreign governments were involved in the September 11th attacks. Now another nation is threatening to expand its terrorism to America.

No ally of the United States can commit act on war on its soil. Theoretically Israeli hit teams could already be here. Remember the DEA report last year about hundreds of Israeli spies posing as art students and stalking federal agents that were deported by the U.S. government. If Islamic terrorist cells may already be here it is entirely possible that Israeli hit squads are in place.

The U.S. should immediately pull all foreign aid, both monetary and military assistance from Israel. Immigration should be halted across the board, but especially from Middle Eastern countries, including Israel. Israeli citizens must be deported immediately.

If the United States does not have the political will to protect and defend its sovereign territory, then it does not have a right to exist, and probably won’t.

Either UPI fabricated the report and manufactured the Israeli government informants quoted in it or Israel is an enemy of the United States.

The Bush administration should send a clear signal that if Israel carries out acts of terrorism in the United States then war will follow.

Joe Sansone is the founder and president of USA Daily as well as a weekly columnist.

The Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee will begin deliberating new regulations Sunday that would enable the authorities to declare foreign organizations and citizens terrorists.

These regulations are designed to conform to international declarations on terrorism used by the United Nations and in the West.

Two years ago, the Knesset legislated a ban on funding terrorism, which is punishable by a 10-year term in prison and the confiscation of property belonging the the convicted organization or individual.

There has been a long delay in presenting the new regulations to the approval of the Knesset, which stems in part from disagreement between security officials over who or what constitutes a terrorist.

The security authorities would like to be the ones to decide who is a terrorist, and this issue has not been resolved. At this stage, the authority deciding the issue is the "one appointed by the prime minister."

Another point of contention remains between the state and the banks, and the method through which the authorities will inform the financial institutions that they have declared someone "terrorist."

The regulations do offer guidelines for the following: the details that will be included in the declaration of a person or an organization as "terrorist"; the ways such information will be released; the ways an appeal may be filed.

According to the regulations, whoever is declared a terrorist or a terrorist organization will be informed about this only after a declaration is made. This will allow them to appeal the decision but not defend themselves against the declaration.

An Israeli soldier slashes the tires on Palestinian private cars on 11 Jan 2003, following the new closure imposed on the Occupied Territories

"The best thing is that you're not obliged to follow any laws or rules. You feel like you are the law. You are the law. You decide. It's as if the moment you leave Israel and pass through the Erez Checkpoint into the Gaza Strip, you are the law. You are God."

- comment by one of the IDF soldiers interviewed by Israeli psychologist Nofer Ishai-Karen. Cited by Dalia Karpel in an article entitled The Person Who Gets People To Talk/המדובבת which was published in Ha'aretz's Hebrew edition on 21 Sept 2007, but did not appear in the English edition. (Translation mine).

mercredi 19 décembre 2007

Chief Rabbi calls for compilation of computerized database of all Jews to prevent marriages deemed sinful by Jewish law

Kobi Nahshoni12.19.07 Israel Jewish Scene

"A strictly observant, learned man who studied at a prestigious yeshiva recently applied for permission to marry. But a rabbinical examination revealed that he was not even Jewish - his father married had a gentile woman after the Holocaust and had been too ashamed to tell his children the truth."

The above is one of the examples Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger cited as leading him to begin working towards the establishment of a worldwide information center in which information on all Jewish marriages will be stored.

"There is a need for a computerized center to gather information on all Jews who marry according to Jewish law," Metzger said on Monday at the 'World Conference on Jewish Civil Law' in Jerusalem. In his speech, the rabbi stressed the importance of marriage witnesses' testimony to prevent legal errors.

Rabbi Metzger said that there is a need to correct stringent rulings on marriage registrations in Israel and abroad so as to avoid situations in which couples come before the rabbinate to marry and are rejected.

Today, in Jewish communities across the world, anyone who wants to marry is forced to prove their Judaism by submitting to an in-depth investigation by a rabbinical court of Jewish law (Beit Din).

This year marked the 17th year of the annual conference which was held over the course of three days - in which dozens of speakers took part in varied discussions, among them former chief rabbis of Israel, chief local rabbis, rabbinical judges, yeshiva heads, public figures, Knesset members and legal scholars.

In his opening remarks, organizer Rabbi Arusi called on the ministers and MK's in attendance to approve of legislation aiming to transfer more powers to rabbinical courts and to bestow the courts with legal authority rather than simply view them as arbiters.

dimanche 16 décembre 2007

Public Security Minister Avi Dichter canceled a trip to Britain over concerns he would be arrested due to his involvement in the decision to assassinate the head of Hamas' military wing in July 2002.

Fifteen people were killed in the bombing of Salah Shehade's house in Gaza, among them his wife and three children, when Dichter was head of the Shin Bet security service. He is the first minister to have to deal with a possible arrest.

Dichter was invited to take part in a conference by a British research institute on "the day after" Annapolis. He was supposed to give an address on the diplomatic process.

Dichter contacted the Foreign Ministry and sought an opinion on the matter, among other reasons because of previous cases in which complaints were filed in Britain and arrest warrants were issued on suspicion of war crimes by senior officers who served during the second intifada.

The Foreign Ministry wrote Dichter that it did not recommend he visit Britain because of a high probability that an extreme leftist organization there would file a complaint, which might lead to an arrest warrant. The ministry also wrote that because Dichter was not an official guest of the British government, he did not have immunity from arrest.

Dichter's bureau said in response that the minister does not intend to go to Britain on any type of official or unofficial visit until the matter of the arrest warrant is resolved.

Dichter was already charged in a civil suit in the United States in 2005 for his part in the decision to assassinate Shehade. But in this U.S., this is not a cause for arrest.

British law, however, states that a private individual can file a complaint against another person for offenses such as war crimes. According to the law, such a complaint might lead to the court issuing an arrest warrant, or a summons to criminal investigation or clarification of the complaint by the police, or even the opening of criminal proceedings.

Dichter is the first minister to face this problem, which has mainly affected senior officers in the Israel Defense Forces. Transport Minister Shaul Mofaz, formerly chief of staff, encountered a similar problem when he traveled to Britain in 2002 before becoming defense minister. Other officers in a similar predicament included former chief of staff Moshe Ya'alon and former GOC Southern Command Doron Almog.

In September 2005, Almog flew to London and found that a British police officer was waiting in the terminal with an arrest warrant. Almog remained on the plane and returned to Israel to avoid an embarrassing incident.

Israel has brought up the subject over the past few weeks with the British government. Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni demanded in separate meetings with British Foreign Secretary David Miliband that the British government work seriously to change the law that harms former IDF officers. Miliband said his government was working on the matter but did not promise anything.

After the incident in which Almog was almost arrested, a joint foreign ministry-justice ministry team worked to hire a major law firm in London to represent Israeli officers if they were arrested.

Senior officials met with a number of the most prominent London firms, some of which offered to provide the service pro bono. But none of the firms were hired, and the idea was set aside.

jeudi 13 décembre 2007

Alan Dershowitz is a crafty debater, a capable attorney and a ferocious defender of Israel. He is also a Harvard professor and a former member of OJ Simpson's legal defense called the Dream Team.

An article by Dershowitz appeared on op-ed page of the Wall Street Journal on November 7, 2007, titled "Democrats and Waterboarding". In that article Dershowitz makes a spirited defense of waterboarding, going so far as to say that (he believes) the Democrats "will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror." Dershowitz thinks the Democrats are headed for trouble if they assume the "pacifistic stance" that he identifies with Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore. By using Moore and Sheehan as examples; it is clear that Dershowitz accepts the media's attempts to dismiss them as part of an imaginary "leftist fringe".

Instead, Dershowitz holds up ex-New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani as an example of a candidate whose popularity has steadily grown because of his "tough" stance on national security issues. Dershowitz uses the "national security" hobgoblin in the same way as Bush; to justify government activities that conflict with our existing laws and basic principles. It is a neat bit of lawyerly footwork, but unconvincing.

In Dershowitz's defense, it is true that he does not approve of "the routine use of torture", but only in the rare situation when it might be useful in gaining " preventive intelligence information about imminent acts of terrorism--the so-called "ticking bomb" scenario." But, who decides? Do we bestow this authority on men who have already proven to be untrustworthy---on men who have already created an industrial scale system of torture in black sites around the world? Who do we trust with these new powers?

And how do we know when a so-called "terrorist suspect" is a terrorist at all? Are we being asked to forgo due process and the presumption of innocence along with our revulsion to cruel and inhuman treatment?

Dershowitz's loves to use the "ticking time-bomb" scenario and trots it out at every opportunity. It is a very persuasive argument, until one really examines the implications. Jose Padilla was supposedly a "ticking time-bomb", wasn't he? According to the earliest public statements by the Bush administration, Padilla had smuggled a nuclear device or "dirty bomb" into the country and was planning to use it in a terrorist attack against American civilians. But it wasn't true. The government had fabricated the entire story and kept him in prison without charges for over 4 years on claims that were manifestly false. The Bush administration has never offered an explanation for their lies.

Padilla's attorney has produced convincing evidence that he was repeatedly tortured in prison and was, thus, driven insane. And for what? The government knew that he was not involved in a terrorist plot to kill Americans. Under Dershowitz's regime, Padilla's treatment would be entirely justified. Is that what we want?

The "ticking time-bomb" argument is a way of challenging our core values. It's a test. It's like asking, "How much are we really willing to sacrifice for the sake of our beliefs? Are we willing to risk our lives and the lives of the people we love ?" Or are we ready to "throw in the towel" and hand the government even greater and more lethal powers hoping that they'll keep us safe?

In Dershowitz's book, "Shouting Fire: Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age", he says:

"No torture would be permitted without a "torture warrant" being issued by a judge....An application for a torture warrant would have to be based on the absolute need to obtain immediate information in order to save lives coupled with probable cause that the suspect had such information and is unwilling to reveal it....The warrant would limit the torture to nonlethal means, such as sterile needles, being inserted beneath the nails to cause excruciating pain without endangering life."

It's shocking that a respected author and attorney would actually qualify the type of needles ("sterile") that can be used while conducting torture. Can we see how outrageous this is?

The excerpt proves that Dershowitz advocates torture. The support for "torture warrants" is support torture. Period. It doesn't matter if the torture is limited to extreme cases or not. It's barbarism. More importantly, it is barbarism that is vindicated by the state.

Dershowitz has been defending his position on torture for more than 4 years. Here are his comments in 2002 from the op-ed page of the SF Chronicle :

"If American law enforcement officers were ever to confront the law school hypothetical case of the captured terrorist who knew about an imminent attack but refused to provide the information necessary to prevent it, I have absolutely no doubt that they would try to torture the terrorists into providing the information.

Moreover, the vast majority of Americans would expect the officers to engage in that time-tested technique for loosening tongues, notwithstanding our unequivocal treaty obligation never to employ torture, no matter how exigent the circumstances."

"Want to Torture; Get a Warrant", SF Chronicle 2002)

Dershowitz is mistaken. According to every survey conducted in the last 5 years, the majority of American people are overwhelming opposed to torture and-I dare say---they are equally opposed to cops who take the law into their own hands and "engage in that time-tested technique for loosening tongues." What Dershowitz is suggesting here is deadly serious and paves the way for routine abuses of power and police brutality. It is a wonder that the Bar hasn't stepped in and chastised him for his public stance on this issue.

Dershowitz's logic is also flawed. His argument can be reduced to this: "The cops are going to torture anyway, so let's give them the green light by providing them with "torture warrants"? Isn't that what he is saying?

This is from the same article:

"Every democracy, including our own, has employed torture outside of the law....Throughout the years, police officers have tortured murder and rape suspects into confessing -- sometimes truthfully, sometimes not truthfully."

Again, this is poorly argued. Dershowitz is using the same feeble defense that schoolchildren use when they're caught breaking the rules: "Everyone else was doing it." That is not an acceptable defense for torture.

Finally, Dershowitz offers this threadbare excuse for waterboarding:

"There are some who claim that torture is a nonissue because it never works---it only produces false information. This is simply not true,as evidenced by the many decent members of the French Resistance who, under Nazi torture, disclosed the locations of their closest friends and relatives."

Dershowitz is invoking the classic "ends justifies the means" defense, but not very cogently. What difference does it make if the information that is extracted through "physical coercion" is of some utility or not if the system you are trying to defend has been obliterated by your actions? It doesn't require a finger-wagging patriot or a moralizing scold to see that state-sanctioned torture means the end of the republic. There is no such thing as "legal torture". It is a contradiction in terms. Torture is an assault on the fundamental rights of man and the rule of law. It is one of "red lines" that we don't cross because on the other side is tyranny.

There are certain basic assumptions upon which our country was founded and the entire legal and political system rests. These are our core beliefs; they are not facts. That's why the preamble of the Constitution reads: "We hold these truths to be SELF EVIDENT" because the founders posited that these beliefs did not require proof among civilized people. Among those "assumptions" is the idea of "inalienable rights" and the intrinsic value of man. Inalienable rights can't be casually swept away by a presidential signing statement or a congressional edict legalizing "torture warrants" any more than the Congress can haphazardly repeal habeas corpus by passing the Military Commissions Act. That's beyond their "pay grade". These officials weren't elected to rewrite the Constitution, but " to preserve, protect and defend" it to the best of their ability. These core principles cannot be changed without destroying the country itself.

Is that the hidden agenda here; to reshape the nation according to an ethos that is more disposed to autocratic government?

The Constitution isn't a security blanket. If we want to minimize the number of terrorist attacks on American citizens or US institutions; we should stop using war as an implement of foreign policy. As Noam Chomsky says, "The best way to stop terrorism; is stop committing it." That's good advice. We ought to put that on a billboard in front of the White House so the occupants can mull it over every day on their way to work.

Dershowitz's ruminations on waterboarding offer nothing constructive as far as national security is concerned. It just more demagoguery.

I agree with Dershowitz that "waterboarding cannot be decided in the abstract." Nor has it been. It has been thoroughly researched and condemned under the Geneva Conventions, the US military, and every human rights organization on earth. The issue has already been decided. It is torture, pure and simple, and no amount of legalistic gibberish changes a thing.

There's another reason for rejecting torture besides the fact that it is morally abhorrent, or because it conflicts with our reading of the Constitution, or even because it abrogates the presumption of innocence, due process, the right to attorney, habeas corpus and every other principle to which we claim to adhere.

The real reason that torture should be rejecte is because it confers more authority on the state than is prudent for the safety and welfare of "We the people". The state is now"and has always been"the greatest threat to human rights and civil liberties. That's truer today--in our post 9-11 world--than ever before. The state is the natural enemy of personal freedom.

Dershowitz's polemic has nothing to do with his alleged interest in the security of the American people. That's hogwash. It is an attempt to expand the authority of the state by softening public attitudes towards torture. It's a blatant power-grab, pure and simple; and should be repudiated by anyone who grasps its true meaning.

mardi 11 décembre 2007

Up until only a few weeks ago, it was a trial that was almost assured to take place against one of the most powerful and dangerous organizations ever to work against American interests–AIPAC. After years of investigations and hundreds of hours of surveillance and wiretaps, a mountain of evidence the size of Mt. Sinai was gathered against the accused spies Rosen and Weissman and promised a victory for the American people as seemingly easy as pouring water out of a boot with the directions on the heel.

The resulting aftershocks would no doubt have resulted in major political changes taking place over time with regards to America's cozy love affair with Israel. The resulting fallout ensuing from AIPAC being associated with the dirty business of treason and espionage would have eventually led to it being forced to register as the lobby of a foreign government, which it most certainly is.

More than that though, and the more dangerous as far as AIPAC is concerned, is that a shift in how Americans see the relationship between their own country and a nation that engages in aggressive espionage against them would have taken place. Those running this nest of spies understood this all too well, which is why calls were made, visits were paid and why strings were pulled to see to it that 'the fix' was put in place in scuttling this important trial before it even began.

Now, based on recent events, tragically it appears that not only is America going to be denied the justice she deserves, she may not even get her day in court. Besides the several delays granted by presiding Judge TS Ellis since charges were first brought against the 2 accused spies Rosen and Weissman over 3 years ago, now other developments suggest the likelihood of this case going to trial has been seriously compromised. If indeed this turns out to be the case than America's security stands to be threatened in a manner never before seen in her history.

In an unprecedented move that portends serious problems for the people of the United States, US District Court Judge Ellis has granted several requests on the part of the two accused spies for Israel that bode ill. The first involves forcing current and former high-ranking US government officials to testify, including figures no less in stature than current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Ex-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, National Security Council chief Stephen Hadley, ex-DoD official Douglas Feith, Elliot Abrams, Richard Armitage and others who all played instrumental roles in getting America on board with the current illegal invasion and obliteration of Iraq. The list (basically a who's who of Zionist Neocons, puppets and puppet masters alike) are individuals up to their ears in the gangsterism of Neocon politics and who have gotten their hands dirty at the behest of the parent company employing the accused spies Rosen and Weissman, Israel.

To all except those who understand the organically-dirty nature of Zionist intrigue, this latest appears to be but a harmless (albeit ridiculous) legal maneuver on the part of the defense, similar in its flavor to an accused bank robber claiming that his string of crimes are part and parcel of his inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To those however who have had the scales removed from their eyes with regards to the gangsterism of Zionist political maneuvering, this latest represents a subtle yet unequivocal threat on the part of Israel and her supporters, akin to a mugger pointing an unseen gun at his would-be victim from within a coat pocket.

The defense's argument (in addition to the ridiculous assertion that the present case is an issue of 'freedom of speech') is that the top-secret information (some of it classified 'SCI,' the highest classification that exists) received by the two accused spies Rosen and Weissman from former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin (convicted of espionage and sentenced to 13 years) and which they in turn passed along to Israel was 'nothing out of the ordinary' and the sort of thing that 'happens all the time' between good friends like America and Israel.

Based on everything known about the relationship between Israel and America (and particularly with the administration of George Bush) this may be the one time in its long history of lying that AIPAC is actually telling the truth. The information passed along by Pentagon analyst Franklin is undoubtedly a drop in the bucket compared to what has most likely been passed along to Israel by the previously-named officials now being called to testify.

In other words, Rice and the other administration officials being forced to admit under oath that they themselves passed national defense secrets on to representatives of a foreign government would in the process be incriminating and opening themselves up for possible criminal prosecution, and this is obviously something not likely to occur.

In comparative terms, this move in forcing the Bush administration to testify as to its own role in sharing top secret information with a foreign government is the courtroom version of “The Sampson Option” (Israel's longstanding military protocol calling for the launch of nuclear weapons against the entire world in the event that her own existence is substantively threatened) a case of “taking the world down with her” in the midst of her own demise. In this instance, what Israel and her high-priced legal team (including the likes of the infamous Abbie Lowell) are saying in effect is 'Go ahead with the trial and we'll spill the beans on what the US government knew and what it has done.' It is no different than Al Capone and his gang threatening to sing like a bird and 'name names' concerning corrupt public officials on the Syndicate payroll if the case goes to trial. With arch-Neocon insiders such as Wolfowitz, Abrams, Feith (and a whole slew of others not appearing in this piece) being called to testify, Americans can be sure that all sorts of embarrassing or even explosive material would be divulged and given to the press, including US government foreknowledge of 9/11 and its subsequent cover-up, the lies told to justify the war in Iraq, the Iranian situation and a basketful of similarly-dirty laundry aired for public consideration. And it would not just involve low-level lackeys such as Rice, Rumsfeld, et al, but would most likely go all the way to the top, involving Bush and Cheney. This is to speak nothing of the information Israel's intelligence service Mossad has acquired on these individuals in terms of their personal lives. Given the fact that the Zionists will not work with anyone except criminals, Americans can be sure that those occupying the highest levels of government have more than a few skeletons in the closet that they prefer remain unknown and unseen. In the event that Rice & Co pull the 'executive privilege' ace out of their collective sleeve and for reasons of national security refuse to answer questions (as recently took place before Congress) the defense can claim it was denied valuable, pertinent testimony and thus call for a mistrial, or worse, that the case be thrown out from the bench.

In the meantime, Israel and her supporters (and particularly among deluded Christians Zionists who make up the 'Amen Corner' in America) would maintain that–once again–the beleaguered Jewish people 'were used' by powerful forces against their own will, and that–once again–the present conundrum is all a product of–surprise, surprise–“anti-Semitism”.

Other troubling developments related to this case include Judge Ellis allowing the defense to interrogate possible jurors for any 'anti-Jewish' feelings on their part. Again, while this may seem like a reasonable thing to do in a court case, what has to be considered is that this particular creature has a history of going to ridiculous and irrational lengths when it comes to this topic. Given what passes for 'anti-Semitism' in the great mind's eye resting atop the infamous New World Order pyramid with all its Kabalistic symbolism, anything (including a prospective juror saying that spying for Israel against America constitutes criminal activity) could easily fall within the parameters of 'Jew hatred' and as such (in the event they are indeed convicted) be used in claiming victim status for the accused. Any doubts that Judge Ellis has been feeling the heat from all the usual suspects over the enormity of this case should be tempered after considering how he (Ellis) spoke sympathetically to convicted spy Franklin before giving him the federally-mandated minimum sentence, saying “I accept your explanation that you didn't want to hurt the United States and that you are a loyal American.”

And if all this weren't bad news enough by itself, there is recent and past history to consider as well. Following in the footsteps of his predecessor Bill Clinton, (who pardoned Mossad agent Marc Rich on his last day in office) there is George Bush and his commuting the sentence of well-known Mossad operative Irving 'Scooter” Libby's. With this as a model there is no reason to believe Bush wouldn't do the same with respect to the two Israeli spies Rosen and Weissman.

Of course, again this is all based on the assumption that the trial will take place at all. Keep in mind that Michael Mukasey, an orthodox Jew who was directly involved in sending back to Israel a whole gaggle of Mossad agents immediately following 9/11 (including the infamous 'High-Fivers' seen filming the destruction of the Twin Towers and cheering) has been made head of the US Justice Department. As such, with a simple phone call he can shut down the trial with all the ease involved in ordering a take-out pizza. Needless to say, Mukasey being made the nation's highest law enforcement officer portends the worst, and particularly with regards to the issue of Israeli espionage against America. Given that he decides who and what will be investigated, it is not hard to imagine FBI counter-espionage teams being pulled off of vital cases involving Israel in order to catch whale poachers in Alaska.

When once speaking about AIPAC, accused spy Steve Rosen compared it to a 'night flower' that 'thrives in the dark and withers in the light of day'. He was not speaking poetically as much as accurately, and he knew it. If Americans knew the extent to which their nation has been plunged into the bloody affairs of Middle East politics, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the gathering storm involving Iran and Syria as a result of this lobby's influence they would burn down the headquarters and run its members out of the country. Excepting something truly apocalyptic taking place, this trial may be the last chance for Americans to wake up to the danger they face as a result of this lobby's influence over their nation's affairs. Anything less than justice being served will result in increased spying on America, both in terms of activity and aggressiveness, increased false flag operations and whatnot. Having no reason to fear the US Justice system, Jonathon Pollards will be crawling out of the wood work like termites boring into the load-bearing beams of the US national security apparatus.

With all this in mind, let all Americans hope and pray that the same omnipotent and merciful God invoked by men such as George Washington still lends an ear to the prayers of good patriots who recognize the danger that their beloved nation faces and that His hand will guide events accordingly.

Rosen lawyer wants Jews to 'rise up'Published: 05/14/2008

U.S. Jews should "rise up" against the classified information case the government has brought against two former AIPAC employees, the lawyer for one of them said.

"The government has misbehaved in this case, but I have to tell you that AIPAC and the Jewish community have misbehaved," Steve Rosen's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said on a Washington-area radio program broadcast May 4.

Rosen, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's former foreign policy chief, and Keith Weissman, its former Iran analyst, were charged in 2005 with dealing in classified information. Their trial date has yet to be set.

The government recently filed a rare pretrial appeal to an appeals court after a number of rulings by federal Judge T.S. Ellis III, sitting in Arlington, Va., undercut much of the prosecution's case.

"The government put a lot of pressure on AIPAC and basically misled AIPAC on what it was that Keith and Steve did," Lowell said.

AIPAC fired Rosen and Weissman about nine months after the FBI first raided AIPAC's offices in August 2004. Since then, the Jewish community has been mostly silent about the case, with the exception of a few protestations, including from the American Jewish Committee and Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive v/ice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

"I would like the community to rise up and, having seen all the public information, as a community start saying to the world, the Jewish world and the non-Jewish world, and the media, to the Justice Department and the attorney general: 'Reconsider. This is wrong. You made a mistake," Lowell said.

"AIPAC and other groups that got snookered, they should admit they got snookered, and they should both embrace these men."

Wall squeezes Bethlehem Christians
By Jon Leyne, BBC News, Bethlehem, 20 March 2006
Palestinians pass through the gateway in the wall around Bethlehem. Israel's 8m-high concrete barrier blocks the road to Bethlehem. It must be barely 10 km from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. Jesus and Mary probably took this road, as they made their way down from Nazareth 2,000 years ago.

vendredi 7 décembre 2007

Jewish U.S. soldiers stationed at Camp Taji in Iraq prepared this menorah for a communal service celebrating Chanukah. (David Goldstrom)

By Rabbi David Goldstrom, 12/07/2007

BAGHDAD (JTA) -- In some ways, this year’s Chanukah in Baghdad seemed just like Chanukah any other year.

Everyone gathered around the menorah outside. I spoke about the meaning of the holiday for us, in Baghdad today.

A few people laughed as I pointed out some of the parallels between the Maccabees of old fighting for their just cause and the work the United States is engaged in every day here in Iraq.

Just like my other Chanukahs in Iraq, I couldn't help but notice that most of those gathered for the menorah lighting were well armed. Each was in uniform and carrying an M-16, M-4 or M-9, all with ammunition, ready for action if needed.

We said the blessings over the lights and sang together under the inky night sky.
(...)
One officer told me there was a $40,000 cash bounty on his head, as well as on those of everyone in his team. In order to keep the bounty from going higher, he tries not to advertise his Jewishness.

A young soldier told me proudly that he originally is from Israel and was only in Baghdad for a few days. Fortuitously, he had seen the Chanukah flyers we had posted all over Camp Taji.

Another soldier told me how glad his mother was that there is a rabbi in Baghdad now, even though he would be heading home in a month.
(...)
A small community of Jews has been meeting here all year long, thanks to the efforts of Capt. Stephen Schwab, who led a weekly Friday night service and organized holiday gatherings with the help of a small group of regulars.---

Counterpoint: Defeating the heathens, David Forman, Dec 8 2007
...The Maccabees are a shining example of people dedicated to fighting all who would threaten the very fabric of Jewish life. Therefore, not only must we fend off those from without who would threaten our existence as a people with a right to its own state, we must also contend with those within our family who would undermine the moral values that have guided us throughout the centuries and led to the establishment of a third Jewish commonwealth - the modern State of Israel...

Pittsburgh sponsored the public lighting of a Chanukah menorah that once prompted a landmark Supreme Court ruling.

In 1986, Chabad-Lubavitch of Pittsburgh, Penn., erected its annual menorah display in front of City Hall. The American Civil Liberties Union sued, claiming the proximity of the candles to City Hall violated the First Amendment separation of church and state.

The case went to the Supreme Court, which ruled in 1989 that the Chanukah display did not constitute government endorsement of religion. Every year since then, the Chanukah menorah has gone up in front of Pittsburgh’s City Hall, but it never has been lit.---

CALIFORNIA - VIDEO: After California's Chabad organization succeeded in gaining the support of Hollywood big shots in its latest telethon, the group's next production was its Hanukkah celebration: a huge bash for the festival of lights that took place in Sacramento on Thursday. The event was attended by none other than California Governor Arnold Schwarznegger himself.

The hour-long festivities were broadcast live to around 100 million people across the United States.

The man responsible for all the merrymaking was Rabbi Chaim Konin, the son of the Chabad representative for west coast of the United States.

Rabbi Shlomo Konin and Arnold Schwarzenegger

(...)
The rabbi revealed the program for the big night: "The military's top brass and many diplomats will come to light the Hanukkah candles along with the governor, but the evening's big surprise will be when Chabad members standing alongside US soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan will light the Hanukkah candles on live television in front of the whole nation.
(...)

After koshering a wing of the White House kitchen with US First Lady Laura Bush, Rabbi Levi Shemtov—dubbed the "Rabbi of Capital Hill"—sets out on his Hanukkah mission. Take a look as Attorney General Michael Mukasey lights Hanukkah candles, President Bush pays his respect to Chabad representatives

Israel Bardugo
12.08.07 Israel Jewish Scene

WASHINGTON - The larger-than-life Hanukkiya towers over gathered onlookers on the Ellipse—a manicured field located near the White House. Crowds fill the carefully-groomed lawn bundled up with heavy jackets in an attempt to insulate themselves from the teeth-chattering cold.

Chabad Hanukkiya on the Ellipse (Photo: Israel Bardugo)

Rabbi Abraham Shemtov wields the microphone and, among much fanfare, calls US Attorney General Michael Mukasey to the podium. Together the pair mounts the crane located nearby and the crowd closely watches as they place a torch up against the large wick to light an oversized Hanukkah candle.(...)

As Mukasey gets off the crane, he delivers a short and concise holiday message: "It's not easy to fight for freedom, the struggle of Hanukkah continues to this day. Today we have Iraq and Afghanistan, just like in the past (there were similar struggles for freedom)."

The Attorney General, who happens to be an observant Jew, takes a moment to reflect on the origins of the perennial holiday and how the lessons from the Hanukkah story can be applied to contemporary events.

"Something very special is going on here," an elderly Jewish man says with a twinkle in his eye. "We are lighting the Hanukkiyah, one of many Jewish symbols, in one of the most symbolic places in all of America. Is there something a Jew can take more pride in than that?" he asks.

Rabbi Abraham Simantov was sent to Washington, DC by the Chabad-Lubavitch organization in 1974. Since then, he says "we have become the Jewish address for every matter and issue."

In the last 15 years, his family including his son Rabbi Levi Shemtov, has come to join him in Washington. The younger Shemtov, deemed the "Rabbi of Capital Hill" by the Washington Post, has managed to get a lot accomplished in the US capital. During his tenure, he has helped strengthen the Chabad organization's ties to US policymakers.

President Bush honoring Chabad rabbis (Photo: Israel Bardugo)

Not long ago, President Bush signed a document dedicating a day of Jewish education in United States in honor of the rabbi. Rabbi Shemtov, who regularly leads educational sessions in the capital to many members of Congress, has succeeded in gathering a robust network of Senators that work to advance Jewish causes.---

Ynet correspondent Israel Bardugo heads to California for Chabad-hosted annual Hanukkah party at Governor Schwarzenegger's residence in Sacramento. Take a look at the festivities that millions in California and America saw broadcasted live

Israel Bardugo
Published: 12.14.07, 21:56 / Israel Jewish Scene

Israel Bardugo with Rabbi of US military. Photo: Israel Bardugo

CALIFORNIA – After meeting with US President George W. Bush and lighting the Hanukkah candles with US Attorney General in Washington, DC, Chabad representatives were granted the opportunity to share the Hanukkah festivities with yet another influential US statesman — California "Governator" Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Rabbi Shlomo Konin, Chabad's chief envoy to California, hosted a Hanukkah candle-lighting celebration at the governor's residence in Sacramento in an elegant affair beamed across California and the US via the major American television networks.

The Hanukkah event has turned into a ritual of sorts with all of California celebrating the holiday with Chabad setting the tone.

Despite heavy rains, this year the festivities attracted Hollywood A-listers as well as soldiers and firefighters. A particular emphasis was placed on expressing appreciation for Californian firefighters for their strenuous efforts and sacrifice to put out California wildfires that plagued southern areas of the state two months ago.

During the ceremony, Governor Schwarzenegger along with Chabad envoys, awarded outstanding firefighters with certificates of appreciation for their heroism in combating the blazes.

Lighting the Hanukkiyah with Rabbi Konin (Photo: Israel Konin)

The ceremony also featured a live broadcast of a candle-lighting ceremony by US soldiers serving overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan who lit the Hanukkiyah with the assistance of Chabad emissaries that managed to arrive to the far-flung destinations.

US troops lighting the menorah in Iraq and Afghanistan (Photo: Israel Bardugo)

Accomplished actor Jon Voight spoke at the event and discussed his involvement with Chabad. He urged people watching at home to support the Chabad organization and its undertakings.

During key-note speaker Governor Schwarzenegger's turn at the podium, he spoke about the miracles that Chabad members had done for California during the wildfires.

He also touched on Chabad's contribution to the state as a whole and shook the hands of the envoys that he said help spread the light of Hanukkah everywhere.---

Check out the photograph here. It’s from the official website of the Chabad Lubavitchers, the Orthodox Judaism group so powerful it pulls the strings of both Dick Cheney and George W. Bush. It shows a bearded Colonel Jacob Goldstein, Chief of Chaplains for New York State’s Army National Guard, sitting on the regal solid gold throne in Iraq exactly in the spot where Saddam Hussein once sat.

Get the symbology here? It was ancient Babylon (modern-day Iraq) that in Jeremiah’s day conquered Jerusalem and Israel and took the Jews captive. Always brimming with hate for their perceived enemies, for centuries the Jews vowed they would get their revenge.

Now, thanks to the military prowess of their proxy state, the USA, the Jewish chieftains rule over Iraq with a bloody iron hand. Their Mossad agents secretly run Abu Ghraib and other torture centers. Their well-trained men direct terrorist acts inside Iraq, blaming the bloodshed on various Islamic factions, causing chaos to run rampant.

It is, in fact, Israel’s oil engineers who are supervising Iraq’s oil pipelines, and the rich, black gold flows nonstop west across Iraq to Israeli depots. And now, their New York rabbi symbolically sits on the throne of power as the 21st Century’s King of Babylon!

Having conquered Babylon, Israel’s Zionist Masonic leadership, working hand-in-glove with Zionist neocon counterparts in the Bush Administration, have their sights set on Iran and Syria, to be quickly followed by the oil-rich Persian Gulf sheikdoms. Greater Israel is the immediate goal. Global Domination through control of the oil spigot to the West is the ultimate objective.

Someday, the rabbis are convinced, a kabbalist Jewish Messiah will sit on the throne of world power.

"And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself and magnify himself... and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods...
Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain..." (Daniel 11:36-39)---

Dov Zakheim : Ordained rabbi, American-Israeli "Dual citizen", Deputy Comptroller of the Pentagon, who worked on the governments remote controlled flight program prior to his tenure at the Pentagon. Under Mr. Zakheim, the Pentagon was found to be missing $2.3 trillion as was announced by Rummy the day before 9-11. Founding member of PNAC (neocon blueprint for world domination)---

Magnate in U.K. scandal: I feared charges of a 'Jewish conspiracy'
By Nathan Jeffay, The Forward and Haaretz Service, 07/12/2007
The British real estate magnate accused of funneling political donations to the British Labour Party said on Thursday that he had given the money secretly to avoid accusations of being part of a Jewish conspiracy, the British Jewish Chronicle reported on Friday.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Rupert Murdoch's younger son James will take over News Corp's (NWSa.N: Quote, Profile, Research) Asian and European operations, according to a source familiar with the matter, in a move that appears to position him as the global media empire's heir apparent.

James Murdoch, 34, will step down as chief executive of satellite television operator British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc (BSY.L: Quote, Profile, Research) and become its nonexecutive chairman. BSkyB's Chief Financial Officer Jeremy Darroch is expected to get the CEO job, the source said on Thursday.

In his new role, James will control News Corp's international broadcasting, print and Internet divisions from Asian satellite television operator Star TV to Sky Italia.

"This is grooming James for a larger role longer term at News Corp," Pali Research analyst Richard Greenfield said. "He has proved himself beyond a doubt over the last several years at BSkyB."

His return to News Corp addresses long-held investor concern over who will take over the media and communications conglomerate from the 76-year-old mogul.

Rupert Murdoch's older son, Lachlan, 36, was once a top executive at News Corp and viewed as the heir apparent, but he left the company in 2005 to start a new venture, Illyria.

Like his father, who built one of the world's biggest media companies from two newspapers in Australia, James Murdoch has a reputation for being a risk taker and aggressive deal maker.

Although accused of nepotism in 2003 when he was named CEO of BSkyB, James has gotten high marks from analysts and shareholders for expanding the company from a TV service into broadband and digital phone services.

But his competitive style has also made him a target of regulators. He leaves BSkyB engaged in three regulatory investigations, including one by Britain's Competition Commission for the company's 2006 purchase of a 17.9 percent stake in commercial broadcaster ITV (ITV.L: Quote, Profile, Research). The Commission has said the stake restricts competition.

The news of the changes, which were first reported on the Guardian's Web site, comes a week before News Corp closes its $5.6 billion deal to buy The Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co Inc. (DJ.N: Quote, Profile, Research)

Tall and smoothly charming, James Murdoch had played a key role during strained negotiations with Dow Jones's controlling Bancroft family, fanning speculation then that he would be his father's successor.

Rupert's daughter Elisabeth, 39, was also once considered a leading candidate because of her reputation as a shrewd media deal maker and role as a former managing director of Sky Networks. She left the company in 2000 and set up her own TV production company, Shine.

James's penchant for speaking his mind has gotten him in hot water on occasion, like his father.

A year ago, James launched a blistering attack on the British broadcasting industry and the publicly funded BBC BBC.UL in particular, accusing it of megalomania. In a speech in London, he appealed for less regulation and a free market.

"The triumph of the free market surely indicates that broadcasting should be more like other industries," he said on November 30, 2006.

But broadcasting in Britain was still not sufficiently free-market, he said. "Indeed, the UK's main state broadcasting agency, the BBC, famously fantasizes about creating a 'British Google' -- and wants the taxpayer to fund it.

"This is not public service; it's megalomania," he said.

News Corp's (NWS.AX: Quote, Profile, Research) Australian shares rose 1.84 percent to A$24.85 after news of James Murdoch's new job.